We should do this right, you won't hear any arguments from me. But I am also sure that "W3C time investment" is a code word for years of soul-sucking bureaucratic drudgery. As such, I don't think you meant we should be using W3C process as the measuring stick for doing things "right" in WebKit. There would not be WebKit if we did.
What I hope you meant instead is: * study the problem in the larger context of a Web platform * come up with a set of use cases that cover the problem * design a solution based on the use cases * build consensus with browser vendors while prototyping it in WebKit * write a spec and a test suite that makes sense * submit this to W3C as time permits. That's what we've always done, right? :DG< On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Simon Fraser <simon.fra...@apple.com> wrote: > My main objection to adding this is that it's just one of many different > types of input device, and if we add these piecemeal for each device that > takes our fancy, we'll end up with a horrible mishmash of different input > events. > > I'd prefer a more general strategy of thinking about all the various types of > input events (e.g. joysticks, remote controls, assistive devices), and having > an API that caters for all of them. This of course would require significant > W3C time investment. > > Simon > > On Aug 24, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Scott Graham <scot...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Simon Fraser <simon.fra...@apple.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I think it's too early to implement this. We should wait until it's a W3C >>>> draft at least. >>> >>> There's certainly work to be done in improving the design. I'm not proposing >>> to slavishly implement the API exactly as specified there. >>> However, I would like to prototype and help with the design of this API by >>> iterating an implementation in the Chromium port. >>> Is a feature flag inappropriate for this? i.e. Should that sort of prototype >>> work be kept downstream indefinitely or until we have a draft spec? >> >> FWIW, keeping implementation "downstream" (that is in Chromium) is >> basically an equivalent of forking, and we should work hard to avoid >> that. But certainly not by just rejecting prototyping outright -- >> because the only workaround for that is forking. >> >> :DG< > > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
